[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 78 (Tuesday, June 14, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6494-S6495]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

  SENATE RESOLUTION 171--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE  
PRESIDENT SHOULD SUBMIT TO CONGRESS A REPORT ON THE TIME FRAME FOR THE 
              WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES TROOPS FROM IRAQ

  Mr. FEINGOLD submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
to the Committee on Armed Services:

                              S. Res. 171

       Whereas United States forces in Iraq have served with 
     courage and distinction and they and their families deserve 
     to know what exactly their mission is and approximately how 
     long they may expect to remain in Iraq;
       Whereas establishing time frames for the transfer of 
     sovereignty and for elections in Iraq has resulted in real 
     political and strategic advantages for the United States and 
     has advanced the development of democracy in Iraq;
       Whereas establishing a clear time frame for the withdrawal 
     of United States troops from Iraq would help to refute 
     conspiracy theories and eliminate suspicions that obstruct 
     the United States policy goals in Iraq and undermine the 
     legitimacy of the Government of Iraq;
       Whereas President George W. Bush stated on April 13, 2004 
     that ``as a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not 
     support an indefinite occupation and neither does America'' 
     and that United States troops will remain in Iraq ``as long 
     as necessary and not one day more'';
       Whereas a sound strategic plan for United States military 
     operations in Iraq would include information regarding the 
     numbers of Iraqi troops that must be effectively trained and 
     the amount of time that will be required to train them;
       Whereas the President has declined to set out specific 
     goals for the United States military operations in Iraq or a 
     clear time frame for achieving such goals;
       Whereas a clear plan and time frame for United States 
     military operations in Iraq would facilitate more responsible 
     budgeting for the costs of United States operations in Iraq; 
     and
       Whereas confusion about the United States mission in Iraq 
     does not serve the United States vital interests in 
     establishing stability in Iraq or fighting the terrorist 
     networks that continue to threaten the United States: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That--
       (1) the Senate--
       (A) supports the men and women of the Armed Forces of the 
     United States in Iraq and deeply appreciates their admirable 
     service; and

[[Page S6495]]

       (B) recognizes that stability, democracy, and respect for 
     the rule of law in Iraq are in the United States national 
     interest; and
       (2) it is the sense of the Senate that--
       (A) the United States should remain committed to providing 
     long-term diplomatic and political support to the people of 
     Iraq to achieve stability and democracy;
       (B) the United States should work diligently to accelerate 
     the sound and effective training of Iraqi security forces and 
     to increase international cooperation in this endeavor so 
     that the people of Iraq may assume responsibility for their 
     own security;
       (C) the United States should continue to pursue a robust 
     and multi-faceted campaign to dismantle and defeat 
     international terrorist networks in Iraq and around the 
     world; and
       (D) not later than 30 days after the date that the Senate 
     agrees to this resolution, the President should submit to 
     Congress a report that describes--
       (i) the remaining mission of the Armed Forces of the United 
     States in Iraq;
       (ii) current estimates of the time frame required for the 
     United States to achieve that mission, including information 
     regarding variables that could alter that time frame; and
       (iii) a time frame for the subsequent withdrawal of United 
     States troops from Iraq.

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today, I am submitting a resolution that 
addresses a gaping hole in the administration's rhetoric and strategy 
with respect to Iraq. My resolution calls on the President to define 
the mission of our military in Iraq, and to issue a plan and timeframe 
for accomplishing that mission. It has been over 2 years since the 
President launched the war in Iraq, but we still don't have a defined 
mission or timeframe that would allow us to hold ourselves accountable 
for giving the military the tools they need to succeed in achieving 
those goals. My resolution also calls for a plan for the subsequent 
withdrawal of U.S. troops, so that we can provide some clarity with 
regard to our intentions and restore confidence at home and abroad that 
there is an end date in mind.
  This resolution does not establish a timeframe for troop withdrawal--
that is for our military commanders to determine. Any such timeframe 
has to be flexible--there are variables that will affect how quickly 
various missions can be accomplished. But it's hard to conceive of an 
effective strategic plan that isn't linked to some timetables.
  The rationale for our military action in Iraq has changed over time. 
The projections regarding the resources that would be required were 
wrong. And now we seem to be in the midst of some vague policy of 
muddling through. When I speak to servicemen and women in Wisconsin and 
in Iraq, and when I speak to their families, their pride in their 
service is evident and it is well-earned. But their frustration with 
this open-ended commitment, with the stop-loss orders and the multiple 
deployments, with the extensions and the uncertainties, is equally 
evident, and it is painful. We can do better by them, by insisting on 
clarity, by insisting on accountability, and by assuring them that we 
have a plan with clear and achievable goals.
  In fact, by leveling with the American people about our commitment in 
Iraq, the administration can regain some of their confidence. After the 
shifting justifications for this war, after the premature declarations 
of ``mission accomplished,'' after the exciting and inspiring 
elections, we still don't have any kind of finish line for our military 
engagement in Iraq. The American people and our troops deserve a sound 
plan that is linked to real timeframes and real achievements.
  A real timeframe will also help us achieve our security goals in 
Iraq. The most common argument against clarifying how long we plan to 
keep troops in Iraq goes something like this: If we reveal a timetable, 
insurgents and terrorists will simply lie in wait, emerging in force to 
achieve their goals once we are gone.
  But any responsible timetable for U.S. withdrawal would be based just 
on the establishment of a competent Iraqi force. Americans won't leave 
until that force has the training it needs to succeed. An Iraqi force, 
which would not suffer from shortages of translators or struggle to 
bridge the cultural divide, is the right force to handle any resurgent 
threat.
  Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the administration's refusal to 
set a plan and timetable about just how long vast numbers of U.S. 
troops will remain in Iraq is actually an advantage for insurgents and 
terrorists. This large U.S. military presence smack in the middle of 
the Arab world is a major recruiting tool for international terrorist 
networks, and young men are coming to Iraq from around the world to get 
on-the-job training in attacking Americans. These foreign forces are 
motivated by our presence, and they feed off conspiracy theories and 
suspicions regarding American intentions. When I was in Baghdad in 
February, a very senior coalition officer confided to me that he 
believed a public U.S. timetable for withdrawing from Iraq would ``take 
the wind out of the sails'' of the insurgents.
  What's more, the indefinite presence of vast numbers of American 
troops could also undercut the legitimacy of the Iraqi government in 
the eyes of many--ironically, destabilizing Iraq despite our best 
intentions. Having a timetable for the transfer of sovereignty and 
having a timetable for Iraqi elections have resulted in real political 
and strategic advantages for the U.S. Having a timetable for the 
withdrawal of troops should be no different.
  Clear plans could also help lead to responsible budgeting. This 
administration has bypassed the regular budget process, placing 
hundreds of billions of dollars on the country's tab, on the grounds 
that requirements are simply ``unknowable'' and cannot be incorporated 
into responsible budget planning. This is simply not credible, and 
continuing to mortgage our children's future with these irresponsible 
policies is unacceptable. It is time to hold ourselves accountable for 
the costs of this war, time to accept the tough choices that come with 
responsible budgeting, and time to insist on sound planning and clarity 
about all of this is going.
  This resolution is not some kind of cut-and-run strategy, or a call 
to bring all of our troops home now, regardless of what remains to be 
achieved on the ground. It is clear to me that we still have military 
missions on the ground--most notably, training the Iraqi forces to 
provide for their own security. Moreover, a military response--as well 
as a diplomatic response, and a financial response--is vital in 
combating terrorist networks in Iraq and elsewhere. It may well be that 
some units--perhaps special forces--will be operating in Iraq in 
coordination with the Iraqi military well into the future as part of 
the counterterrorism strategy that we need to be pursuing around the 
world, not just in Iraq.
  But Mr. President, the military is only one part of solving the 
puzzle that we face in Iraq. For many years to come, we will have to 
work diligently to combat a burgeoning culture of corruption in Iraq, 
or the rule of law doesn't stand a chance. We need to make 
reconstruction work and deliver real democracy dividends for the Iraqi 
people, and this work will go on for some time. Intense American 
diplomatic and political engagement and support are likely to continue 
long after all or most of the troops are withdrawn.
  Our troops on the ground are truly amazing in their resolve, their 
professionalism, and their sincere desire to help the people of Iraq. 
Their courage and commitment was underscored for me during my trip to 
Iraq earlier this year. I want to help these brave men and women 
succeed, by insuring that they have an achievable mission, sound 
planning, and a reasonable timeframe in which to finish their part of 
the job.

                          ____________________